Why Didn't the Allies Bomb Auschwitz?

“The great powers had photographs of the railway routes that the trains took to… Auschwitz,” Pope Francis remarked last week.

“Tell me,” he asked, “why didn't they bomb them?”

The pontiff’s question is not merely a matter of historical curiosity. It raises issues of morality, diplomacy, and American foreign policy with profound implications for our own times.

The reason the Allies had photos of the railways leading to Auschwitz is that throughout the spring of 1944, Allied planes conducted surveillance of the area in preparation for bombing German oil factories, some of which were less than five miles from the gas chambers and crematoria.

Yet when Jewish organizations asked the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration to bomb the railway lines or the death camp itself, U.S. officials replied that such an operation was not feasible because it would require “diverting” planes from the battlefield. That was false; those oil factories were very much a part of the battlefield.

Ironically, the administration did repeatedly divert military resources or change military plans for other non-military objectives – just not for the Jews. For example, an Air Force plan to bomb the Japanese city of Kyoto was blocked by Secretary of War Henry Stimson because he admired the city’s artistic treasures. Assistant Secretary of War McCloy diverted American bombers from striking the German city of Rothenburg in order to spare its famous medieval architecture. Allied ships were diverted to bring thousands of Muslims on a religious pilgrimage to Mecca in 1943 – at the same time U.S. officials were saying no ships were available to take Jewish refugees out of Europe.

The Roosevelt administration opposed calls by Jewish groups to create a government agency to rescue Jewish refugees – but it established a government agency “for the protection and salvage of artistic and historic monuments in Europe.” (That episode was chronicled in the recent George Clooney film, “Monuments Men.”) General George Patton even diverted U.S. troops to rescue 150 of the prized Lipizzaner dancing horses in Austria, in April 1945.

Along these same lines, Pope Francis might ask Vatican historians about Allied policy concerning the bombing of Rome. In the summer of 1943, the Allied High Command was anxious to bomb Rome, since it was, as the New York Times put it, “a railway and communications center for Germany and Italian war material.” But Roosevelt feared Catholic voters would blame him if religious sites were damaged or if many civilians were harmed, so a slew of changes and restrictions were imposed on the military.

Leaflets were dropped on the city the day before the attack, warning that bombing was imminent, thus surrendering the advantage of surprise. The bombing was carried out in broad daylight, increasing the danger to the pilots’ lives, in order to make it easier to avoid religious shrines. The bombing crews were given maps showing religious and cultural buildings to be avoided, with the words “Must Not Be Harmed” stamped in large red letters. The bombardiers were ordered to refrain from dropping bombs if there was “any doubt” as to where the bombs would land.

Why the double standard? Why was the Roosevelt administration willing to undertake diversions from standard military policy when medieval artwork, or dancing horses, or Catholic shrines were in danger, but – as Pope Francis noted this week – it refused to “divert” a few bombs to strike the railways that were bringing hundreds of thousands of Jews to their deaths?

It’s no easier to “trust the world” today than it was during the Holocaust.

Internal memoranda between senior officials of the Roosevelt State Department during 1941-1943 – the peak of the Holocaust – provide the tragic answer. One official, Cavendish Cannon, opposed rescuing Jews from Rumania because it was “likely to bring about new pressure for an asylum in the western hemisphere… a migration of the Rumanian Jews would therefore open the question of similar treatment for Jews in Hungary and, by extension, all countries where there has been intense persecution.” His colleague Robert Alexander opposed rescuing Jews on the grounds that it would “take the burden and the curse off Hitler.” And R. Borden Reams warned of “the danger that the German government might agree to turn over to the United States and to Great Britain a large number of Jewish refugees.” An administration that viewed Jewish refugees as a “curse” and a “burden” was not going to take any steps that would leave it with large numbers of Jewish refugees on its hands.

Pope Francis made his Auschwitz remark while speaking to a group of young people about why they “find it hard to trust the world.” He was right – but why cite only the 1940s? Young people today see how the international community lets the architect of the Darfur genocide walk free, accuses Israel of war crimes for defending itself against war crimes, and yawns as the Syrian regime uses chemical weapons against civilians. It’s no easier to “trust the world” today than it was during the Holocaust.

Dr. Rafael Medoff is director of The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, and coauthor, with Prof. Sonja Schoepf Wentling, of the new book “Herbert Hoover and the Jews: The Origins of the ‘Jewish Vote’ and Bipartisan Support for Israel.”

So true. The world refuses to learn the lessons from world genocides. Human life is no longer valued.. Pets have been replaced and admired. One is reminded of Nazis benevolent treatment of dogs, while shooting innocent babies. What is different today? Absolutely nothing. No moral compass, and the world is silent but voices are raised to blame the Jews and Israel. History repeats itself.

(60)
Jonathon Haddon,
May 7, 2018 4:04 AM

Failure to intervene during the Holocaust

Perhaps somebody with more knowledge of the events at hand could clarify for me whether or not protecting the secret that the German code had been broken by the enigma machine influenced Allied decisions regarding the possibility of bombing the internment camps. Unfortunately, the dates referred to suggest otherwise: the war had turned against Germany by 1944 and making blatant use of the information that had been gleaned via Enigma, such as bombing the camps, likely would have made little impact on the course of the war.

(59)
Commandrine,
January 28, 2017 10:13 PM

Repeating History

History Repeats (haiku duet) "Allies had photos - of routes to the death camps yet - refused to bomb them"; "Allies saved artworks - and dancing horses but not - Jewish refugees"

(58)
H. JOSEPH SIMCKES,
May 29, 2016 4:06 PM

INSIGHTFUL, PROBING QUESTIONS ABOUT U.S. WWII POLICIES TOWARDS THE VALUE OF RESCUING JEWS

AS A PROF. IN A MAJOR U.S. CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY ENGAGED TO TEACH MOSTLY CHRISTIAN COLLEGE STUDENTS ABOUT JUDAISM, I AM MOVED BY THISBRIEF EXPOSE OF ONE OF THE MOST BITTER, SHAME-FUL DECISIONS OF THE ROOSEVELT ADMINISTRATION, I.E. REFUSING TO BOMB THE TRAIN LINES TO AUSCH-WITZ WHEN IT DEFINITELY HAD THE MILITARY MEANS AND MORAL OBLIGATION TO DO IT. THE U.S. GOVERN-MENT OWES ITS OWN CITIZENRY, THE JEWISH PEOPLEAND THE WORLD COMMUNITY A 6,000,000 MEA CULPAS AS A FIRST STEP TO AUTHENTIC TESHUVAH! - RABBI DR. H.J.SIMCKES HOLLIS HILLS, N.Y.

(57)
Geoffrey Megargee,
April 18, 2016 11:15 AM

There's more to this

I would recommend that people interested in this topic should read Michael Neufeld's edited work, The Bombing of Auschwitz: Should the Allies Have Attempted It? It's a thorough examination of the question from all perspectives. For here, I'll just point out two salient facts. First, the Allies could not reach Auschwitz with bombers until 1944, by which the place had done most of its killing. Second, a rail line can be fixed in a day; it's not something one can bomb and say, "ok, that's done."

Yoni,
August 11, 2019 12:36 PM

Even stopping that killing machine for one day would have saved thousands of lives.

There is no justification.

(56)
michal,
March 10, 2016 7:20 AM

thank you for this detailed article.

I had a clue of what happened, but this was much more knowledgeable.

(55)
Paul Reichberg,
March 9, 2016 5:25 AM

Tragedy

US hypocrisy antisemitism

(54)
Anonymous,
December 22, 2015 4:15 PM

Great article with one exaggeration

Great article with one exaggeration. An administration that viewed Jewish refugees as a “curse” and a “burden” is not exactly what Robert Alexander said. He said that saving the Jews would “take the burden and the curse off Hitler.”, meaning that the killing of Jews was a burden on the Reich and a curse to it. So he apparently wanted Hitler to be able to carry out his accursed plans so that there would be clear justification to fight him. A bizarre and immoral stance for sure. But he wasn't calling the Jewish people a curse and burden. But the overall point is certainly true. The world allowed the killing to continue for political and immoral reasons.

(53)
Öregmaci Pet,
September 21, 2015 5:23 PM

Answer Why didn't them bomb Auschwith

One of the main questions is, were the Allied Forces informed (by their spies) about the Wannsee Conference? Was the fate of the Jews important for the military leaders? Was the extermination camps important for them? I'm sure if in GB or USA in the Army they tried to collect a bigger airborne commandos to attack Auschwitz, even if they surely die, a lot of people would have volunteered. (As it happened when nearly hopeless actions were organised, fe. "Bombing Tokyo". Just a few hours ago I read an article: there were devices for lengthening the range of the aircrafts by special added fuel tanks. Not to mention the possibility for using "Kamikaze" pilots, how many people gave h/h life for altruistic reasons during the WW II? Thousands! Loss of a couple fighters, diving bombers would not have been too much as we think the loss of the RAF or USAF during certain periods of the war.

(52)
Rev. P.M.Joseph,
September 2, 2015 12:31 AM

World and the Jewish existence

Most world nations care little about the Jewish people and their right to exist. Politically, they take a stand of political expediency leaving the Jewish nation to fend for itself. Many right thinking people across the World stand with the Jewish people and their right knowing that they suffered injustice along history and they continue to under modern political leadership . As God's own people, the Jews are a special race and with God on the side, they are invincible. carry on and many are with you.

(51)
Mike,
September 1, 2015 5:04 PM

Speechless

This article, leave people like me that knew a part of the truth speechless. What ever horrific things and atrocities the Nazis did, the same level of evil was committed by the allies, by not helping as many as possible Jews to escape the Nazi regime.Shame on them, than, and shame on them today.

(50)
Bill,
September 1, 2015 4:43 PM

Trust in G-d

Fear and trust no man. "Trust in G-d and keep your (gun) powder dry."

(49)
mbrj,
July 10, 2015 9:44 PM

I'm surprised...

I'm surprised that nobody mentioned the fact that the Vatican, the US and the UK all helped many nazis escape to S. America in a kind of underground railroad that I read about years ago. The US government also helped nazis who were able to help the US with certain information and technical knowhow, at the time, to use against their new enemy, the Communists...and allowed many nazis to settle in the US. Isn't this widely known?

(48)
LR,
July 8, 2015 7:42 AM

Why did the Pope bless Hitler's military machine?

"Why did the Pope bless Hitlers military machine" ought to be the reply to Francis Allies railway question!

Stop playing the submissive and feed a pope's ego for the sake of his power on votes and politics.

Never trust a word a pope utters, it is always in the interest of his delusional human hostile pyramidal political power.

Moreover, ask the question whether destroying the railroad would have left any survivors at all? The nazis would most likely have destroyed everything, including the buildings.

Pope Francis, as every pope, is playing politics of scapegoating his own responsibility, and Convemtional Jewry, as usual plays the politically submissive.

(47)
Anonymous,
July 6, 2015 11:24 PM

Practical reasons.

Well, every train that sent Jews to the crematoria was one less train that moved soldiers and weapons to the front line.

Dvirah,
July 8, 2015 3:58 PM

Relative Worth

Whether you meant to or not, you've just said that Jews are worth less then others. A fairly common opinion, it would seem.

mbrjosephs,
July 10, 2015 7:21 PM

Are you serious or are you being facetious?

Depending upon how you would answer this question would tell if you are a Jew hater or saying this tone-in-cheek.

dave,
August 29, 2015 6:01 AM

If my history lessons from watching WWII documentaries have taught me anything the trains used to take Jews and other prisoners to the camps were special trains and not the ones used to move troops.

(46)
Simon David,
July 6, 2015 10:49 PM

Why President Roosevelt didn't bomb the railway lines

During the war there was a large section of American Jewry who believed that Jews in the USA must keep a low profile and not disagree or interfere with any decisions made by President Roosevelt & his advisers since it could be contrived as to give the impression that it would make them look anti American. This was in-spite of the fact that as early as mid 1942 it was well known to USA intelligence & the political elite that there were concentration camps and death camps.This information came from various sources including Rabbi Weismandel & others who risked their lives to smuggle the information, together with plans of the camps out of Europe to get them to be known in the USA. Unfortunately there were people in the Jewish community, like the Reform Rabbi, Rabbi Stephen Wise, who was a close adviser to President Roosevelt, who whenever he was consulted by the president on Jewish matters always belittled and denied the truth of the informants, in spite of the general knowledge of the deportations in the Jewish community & even the famous "March of five hundred Rabbis" who tried to persuade the President to bomb either the camps crematoria or at least the railway lines, were negated by Rabbi Stephen Wise, who blandly said to Roosevelt that they don't represent the majority of Jewish opinion.I don't blame the President or his other advisers, it was people like the so called "Rabbi" Stephen Wise who helped hold back any earlier attention being given to the Death Camps.(See "Yesterday"channel" Winds of Change" about the Second World War, and the efforts of Rabbi Bregman & others who fought a rearguard battle to try influence the President on the importance of disrupting the camps operation).

(45)
arnold powell,
July 6, 2015 4:06 PM

Read Steaming to Victory by Michael Williams. Railway lines were repaired within hours and as such there was no point in bombing them. Bridges and engine repair yards were another matter. The allied priority was correctly the destruction of oil fields and ball-bearing production.

(44)
cliff,
July 3, 2015 11:44 PM

What about Pope Francis?

Last week, Pope Francis signed a "treaty" with "The State of Palestine" acknowledging exclusive Arab rights to East Jerusalem including the Old City. And the Pontiff wonders why young people find it hard to trust the world? Perhaps it is just as hard to trust the Vatican?

(43)
AM,
July 2, 2015 4:53 AM

Jewberals voted for both FDI and for BHO...

Why would we expect any different result today?

(42)
Anna,
July 2, 2015 12:35 AM

The Americans came into the war quite late, as I remember, after the Briitish had been fighting the Germans for some time and suffering terribly in the process. This article seems to assume that only America was involved. I have always understood that the British were reluctant to bomb these places (and much debate went on) because it could result in the deaths of so many people in and on their way to them. I'd guess that many inmates would have chanced it, but how could one bomb a place that held so many innocent people ? What a decision. This was being debated long before the Americans came in. I can't say what their reasons were, of course. but my family was involved with the war from the beginning while America made up its mind if it would come and lend a hand or not. Britain's leaders were not sending troops to rescue fancy horses, they were concerned with fighting Hitler.

I suspect that if the lines had been bombed it wouldn't have stopped the Holocaust. And I don't know if I could have done it, knowing that I might be killing men, women and children in such large numbers, What would any of us do ?

(41)
David Frank Bartl,
July 1, 2015 11:18 PM

What about Pope Pius XII: he did NOTHING to help the Jews during the Holocaust: the American Protestant community did even less, other than the Quakers

What hypocrisy the Catholic Church uses: the notorious Jewish ghetto in Rome was blocks away from the Vatican. Pius XII was an admirer and lover of German culture, being the former Nuncio to Germany prior to becoming Pope. Read Ralph Hochhuth's play The Deputy. What a great travesty and sin committed by the Catholic Church. The Church never read Santayana's words: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Thanks to the author of this article for mentioning the humanitarian Roosevelt's do-nothing approach to rescue the Jews. Jew haters were prevalent in the State Department during the war and their namesakes are still there today. Please read David Wyman's ( a gentile) brilliantly written and researched book, The Abandonment of the Jews.

David Frank BartlFormer Catholic

Bob,
July 2, 2015 5:22 PM

I was going to comment but you said it! Well put, David.

(40)
Anonymous,
July 1, 2015 7:03 PM

HITLER'S POPE by?

The POPE should read the condemnation of the Vatican's role in HITLER'S POPE. I have NOT read the book, but I will this summer/

(39)
Ben,
July 1, 2015 6:18 PM

Thanks for this important article.

Coincidentally, I just finished "While Six Million Died" (Morse). For those that want more detail into the behavior of FDR and his State Department in the 1930's/40's toward European Jewry it is a must read. Very sad and very maddening. So much of this murdering could have been prevented.

(38)
Dvirah,
July 1, 2015 4:03 PM

The Short Answer

Because they did not want to.

(37)
Eileen,
June 30, 2015 10:40 PM

We will never know if one of the Jews might have found a cure for cancer. But we have the Lippezanner Horse shows.

Anonymous,
August 29, 2015 6:27 AM

Eileen you should take a look at israel21c dot org to see what medical breakthrough are being made in Israel.

(36)
Fred,
June 30, 2015 7:52 PM

don't trust THIS world

I believe the real issue here isn't who did or didn't do what during the holocaust. I believe the real issue is that our world is currupt and that we can't depend on mankind, that we must look outside, and look up to our Creator, on our knees, as He is the only one we can trust and depend on.

as a side note, my father was part of Patton's army in WWII, and was part of the liberation of a POW camp that also housed Jews. it changed his whole attitude about the "good" in mankind.

Bud,
July 1, 2015 2:25 PM

Amen

Could not have said it better

(35)
Anonymous,
June 30, 2015 4:35 PM

but saved 2 herds of horses

oh yeah, there was no troops available either, but Patton sent troops to rescue the Lippizzan horses. How many Jewish, Gypsy etc lives did each of those horse cost?

(34)
Sybrand Bakker,
June 30, 2015 4:33 PM

Most leaders of free countries in that time are to blame for not doing anything

When you look at it, both the US and the UK and the USSR refused to do anything about the persecution of the Jews. Also officials in the Netherlands, especially Amsterdam, just 'followed orders'. Even more, Pope Pius XII, never spoke out openly against the persecution of the job. It is easy to condemn one leader or one state for persecuting the Jews. However, it was not only a sin of those leaders, it was the sin of all humanity, and one has to admit a substantial number didn't like the Jews, without resorting to persecution.

(33)
Sharon,
June 30, 2015 6:56 AM

reasonable hypothesis

It very well could be that US leaders, FDR included, failed to bomb the RR tracks to save Jewish lives because they did not wish to be bombarded with Jewish immigration. Mass immigration is never a desirable thing, but absorbing large amounts of Jews was especially distateful to these decision makers.I could find fault with them, but it's more useful to learn the lessons from history - the Jews cannot rely on any foreign country. There are too many conflicting interests, then and today. Neither can Israel rely on the US. Other than Canada, the US is Israel's best friend, but ultimately cannot be trusted.

(32)
Ben,
June 30, 2015 5:21 AM

What Pope Francis said in that same speech

In the same speech that the Pope asked this rhetorical question, he claimed manufacturers & investors of weapons who call themselves Christians practice duplicity. Duplicity? Hmmm? How could the Allies bomb the railway routes without -- bombs? Or the people who manufacture or invest in -- bombs?

(31)
Jean Brannigan,
June 29, 2015 6:20 PM

This dangerous world

We live in an infinitely more dangerous world today. We all need to be vigilant about what is taking place. Some of the things we are hearing today do not bear thinking of. The really serious issue is that all young people are being exposed to such horror on the internet.

Catrina,
June 30, 2015 6:18 AM

More dangerous is not possible

The calamitous, evil triad of Hitler,Mussolini and Stalin exercising absolute,unconstrained,brutal power over their respective countries and bent on extending it throughout the world ; the Gestapo and NKVD daily giving new definition to the concept of evil ; the insane determination to kill every Jew on Earth no matter what the cost . The danger today may be different , but it is not greater .

(30)
DR .ITZIK GOLDBERG,
June 29, 2015 6:10 PM

DROP YOUR KNAPSACK OF PAST HORRORS

EACH TIME A JEW RECALLS NAZI ATROCITIES, I BELIEVE SEVERAL MINI BLOOD VESSELS OF THEIR BRAIN GO INTO SPASM. FRIENDS OF MINE DISCUSSING HORRIFIC EVENTS SUDDENLY FIND LOSS OF WORDS AND NAMES DURING DISCUSSION OF THE VIOLENCE OF THE HOLOCAUST.MEMORY LOSS OR PHYSIOLOGIC CONDITION?

(29)
William Lewis Wexler, Esq.,
June 29, 2015 3:47 PM

smoke from Auschwitz chimneys used as navigational guides

A friend of mine recounted what her father, a general in the Canadian Air Force, told her. He said the camps were not bombed because Allied bombers used the smoke from the crematoria, and the chimneys, as navigational guides on the way to other "more important" & military targets. I have not been able to verify this claim.

(28)
Anonymous,
June 29, 2015 12:30 PM

The Jews in occupied Europe in 1942-5 were not refugees, they were, more accurately, prisoners of the Nazis. At the height of the extermination--1944-3. neither the U.S. nor Britain had long range fighters that could accompany the bombers on missions anywhere close to Auschwietz (or Treblinca). When American bombers bombed Scheinferth in soutern Germany in Aug. and Oct. 43, more then 60 bombers were lost on each raid; Auschweitz was more then 250 miles further away from the bases in Britain. In 1944, after the invasion of Italy, the U.S. established bomber bases in southern Italy which were within range, of Auschweitz, but your articles suggestion that we should have bombed the rail line to the death camp might have stopped the trains for a day or two until the rails (if hit at all during the bombing) could be repaired. With respect to the comment about Americans bombing Rome in daylight, you should know that all the Am. bombing raids in Germany, France, Italy etc were done in daylight--what was called daylight precision bombing--precision usually meaning have bombs land w/in 500 yds of the target. The suggestion that the Nazis would have allowed thousands, let alone hundreds of thousands of Jews to get on ships to sail to America after Hitler declared war on the U.S. is too silly for further comment.

Marvin Greenberg,
June 29, 2015 2:20 PM

Someone kis disstorting the truth!

Dear Anonymous, Isn't the truth painful! Why should I believe you? You must be a righteous Catholic!

(27)
Michael Garfinkel,
June 29, 2015 5:11 AM

Hiding in Plain Sight

One need not revisit the nature of the anti-Semitic Roosevelt administration, nor examine the efforts of State Department men like Cordell Hull and Breckinridge Long to slam the doors shut on even the legally permitted quotas of refugees, to appreciate the obvious: that the Jewish people were deeply despised, and the Allies were not interested in assisting in their survival.

(26)
rachel,
June 29, 2015 3:03 AM

saving cultural treasures...

...is not as important as saving human lives. That being said, I am disturbed by the suggestion that this was an either/or choice. While it was a terrible moral failure of the Allies to do too little to save the Jews, Roma, and other targets of the Nazi death machine, it would.have also been a failure had the war claimed the Kyoto temples, the Sistine Chapel, etc. We mourn the loss of the Second Temple to this day and would be horrified and sickened if, G-d forbid, the Western Wall were to be further damaged. Accordingly, we should try to understand that preserving cultural treasures should be a priority even in wartime.

(25)
P. Pachecos,
June 29, 2015 2:02 AM

Hindsight is usually 20/20

Rumours notwithstanding, I don't believe anyone believed the magnitude of the killings at the time. Besides, winning the war trumped everything else.That said, the Pope is the last person I'd expect to hear waxing indignation over the Allied conduct of the war, especially considering the moral support Pope Pius XII rendered the Nazis during that dark period...

(24)
Linda,
June 29, 2015 2:01 AM

Lucky day for Jews when Truman became President

Roosevelt hated that he was thought to be Jewish. Even though nearly 100 percent of Jews voted for him. He didn't like Jews.Harry Truman had a Jewish partner in business. He was kinder and gentler to the Jews. The Jewish people would have been rescued from the camps if Roosevelt had died earlier.

Anonymous,
July 10, 2015 8:01 PM

Truman may not have saved the Jews either

Although Truman did finally support the reconstitution of the modern Jewish State of Israel, he didn't jump at the idea at first. He needed his arm twisted a bit by his former Jewish partner in the haberdashery store they co-owned.

(23)
Jerry Singer,
June 28, 2015 10:02 PM

The Pope's Question

The Pope's question betrays his ignorance of history! Perhaps he should ask why his predecessor Pope Pious did nothing to help the Jews!

Anonymous,
June 30, 2015 6:22 AM

Rhetorical

I think the Pope's question may have been purely rhetorical .It's a question that should be asked often .

Rachel,
June 30, 2015 8:06 PM

a lot of anti-Pope rhetoric on this thread

Pope Francis is the first non-European Pope. It is entirely possible that he is dismayed by the Church's part in not doing more to save Jews during the Holocaust. He has reached out to Jews and told Catholics to stop bashing gays, and he recently stated that in some cases, marital separation is necessary. AND he has issued an important position paper, called an encyclical, about the dangers of climate change to humanity, especially the poor. I think his question was rhetorical, while raising the specific case of Nazi genocide. It certainly does not "betray his ignorance of history!", just the opposite. And I don't know what kind of military intervention you'd be expecting from the Vatican. (As Stalin said, "How many divisions does the Pope have?")

(22)
Alan B. Katz,
June 28, 2015 9:59 PM

Anti-Semitism was the cause

The most vocal opponents of bombing the railroads, such as John J. McCloy, argued to Marshall and FDR that to do so would (i) make the Germans more hostile to Europe's Jews, if that was possible, and (ii) divert the war effort. They believed the best way to save the Jews and the rest of Europe was to end the war as soon as possible. Whatever merit, if any, there was to these points it must be considered in light of the facts that allied aerial attacks were carried out only 20 miles from Auchwitz/Birkenau and must be viewed through the lens of FDR, who said "The Jews and Irish had better understand that this [America] is a Protestant country and that they [Jews and Irish] must understand that they live here at our sufferance." So much for "One nation under God."

(21)
Rick,
June 28, 2015 9:39 PM

Liberal Jewish vote

These People need to be educated,or face the facks as they exhisted and still do today How????? Do we do this

(20)
lar,
June 28, 2015 9:03 PM

Jews saved.

We forget about the group of Jews who were saved by the bombing. My uncle and thousands of other Jews saved. Jewish American soldiers who fought across Europe. Their task made easier by destroying many of the German Military targets. Bombing quickening their advance which included the liberation of the camps. Yet on memorial day and veterans day I cannot find any articles in the 5 or 6 Jewish papers I read thanking any of those Jewish Americans who fought.

(19)
Ruth,
June 28, 2015 8:47 PM

humans

Yes-these were Jews, BUT first of all & most important--they were human beings. NOT ANIMALS!! Animals are not even treated this way. JUST MAYBE this is when G-d started taking His hands off America, America & the government (I don't think) never apologized for its part in what happened to the Jews then. The war may have been over sooner if the pres. at the time had done what they should have to help the Jews. My respect for my government just went down another notch. The church has a lot to answer for also. It makes me want to cry for what I have read here. The injustice done to my people. (I have been crying.) L-rd===all of those people that could have been saved!!

Anonymous,
June 30, 2015 8:10 PM

America & its Allies saved the world

Are you kidding? Or just crazy? The U.S. and the other Allies won a world war on two fronts. (Just as you say "first and most important -- they were human beings" of European Jews, I would add the same about Chinese and Koreans who were brutally treated by the military forces of Imperial Japan. I am married to the son of French Holocaust survivors who would not have survived had the Allies not fought Nazi Germany to total defeat.

(18)
celia,
June 28, 2015 8:10 PM

And why are the US Jews doing nothing about Iran?

The Jews of the US did very little to save the Jews of Europe during the Holocaust. Today, the exact same constellation of events is taking place right under our noses. Just as it was in the 1940's, the Obama administration which is ruled by Israel hating people and the Jews, who made it possible for this administration to gain power and stay in power for the past six years, are watching as this administration is in the process of enabling Iran to get nuclear power, and, thus, get closer to annihilating Israel. The Jews of the US are preaching "humanitarian values" and "Tikun Olam" while abandoning the six million Jews and a million and a half Arabs who live in Israel today under the threat of annihilation by Iran. Not only are the Jews of the US doing nothing to save the people of Israel from this threat but through electing and keeping the Obama and administration in place, the Jews of the US are directly responsible for the second Holocaust that is about to happen. They learnt nothing from the first Holocaust and are just as evil today as they were in the 1940's.

Anonymous,
July 10, 2015 8:17 PM

Cool your tool, Celia

First of all, the Jews in the 1930s and 1940s, from what my generation was told by our parents, were very dicey years for the American Jew. There was LOTS of anti-Semitism. There were signs, not in the south, but in Philadelphia, at swimming pools reading "no niggers, jews or dogs allowed". The Jews back then didn't have political or financial clout that they did years later. In addition, even though today there is much more freedom for the American Jew, we are under 2% of the total population in America. If you think that we are the reason that Obummer was elected you are deluding yourself. Yes, we have representation in Congress, we are politically involved and we do have monetary clout today...but the Christians far outweigh our numbers tremendously in every area. The blacks, hispanics and moslems all outnumber us. The percentage of Jews in medicine, law, business, recipients of Noble prizes, both in Israel and America (and other parts of the world) far outweigh our numbers, that's true. But to credit or put the blame on the Jews for Hussein's election and re-election and the Iran debacle is stretching things way out of proportion...almost to the point of being anti-Semitic!

(17)
Cal,
June 28, 2015 8:07 PM

Pope Francis is not the brightest light.

There is a simple answer to his query, "Jewish blood is cheap. After all there is that old slander, 'The Jews killed Jesus.' So why should good Christians protect those Jesus killers?"

The reason is hate. Pure unfettered hate, when will you stand against that hate?

(16)
Chris Rettenmoser,
June 28, 2015 7:33 PM

Roosevelt was as bad as the Nazis...

He died with Jewish blood on his hands.

(15)
Mark Kalmanson,
June 28, 2015 7:24 PM

Jewish Democrat Party Voting

Then, why, since the end of WWII, do Jews consistently vote democrat? It wasn't Roosevelt who liberated the death camps. It was Eisenhower and Patton, two conservative republicans.

marshall dicker,
June 29, 2015 2:24 AM

do you EVER know what.....

....youre talking about???

Patton was a big time Anti Semiteand considered Jews LESS than human...

do some research to find out what Pattonthought, believed AND committed to paper!!!

Sorry Mark.....your comment is REALLY stupid...

Eisenhower?? Yes... sure... bless him....he insisted thatas much info, photos, records of the holocaust be kept because as he said " someday people will say this never happened "

but Patton.........yech

Anonymous,
July 1, 2015 4:16 AM

What did Patton Do That Was Anti-Semitic?

B"H,Patton was a strange man which probably contributed to his being a great general officer. But I don't recall him doing anything to hurt Jews.

By your logic Truman was an enemy of the Jews, but yet he supported Israeli statehood. And Nixon regularly made terrible comments about Jews. And he made sure Israel was re-supplied during the Yom Kippur War acting as G-d's agent to help save Israel.Judging people by their comments, most of which were made in private, is not prudent. Words have meaning but actions are more important, especially for general officers.

(14)
Anonymous,
June 28, 2015 7:21 PM

The past and now.

Read Charles Higham's book
Trading with the Enemy. The Secret War Against the Jews
Then look at what is happening today. Maybe Pope Francis should read it to see what the church's involvement was then and what it is now. Some people in politics say the book isn't true. Wishful thinking??

(13)
Anonymous,
June 28, 2015 7:21 PM

anti semetism

Makes you wonder if the Roosevelt Administration was anti semetic. Based on these facts, they may surely have been.

(12)
Anonymous,
June 28, 2015 6:10 PM

Vatican's present position vis a vis Israel

Given the Pope's moral concerns regarding the allies, has he expressed qualms over the immoral behavior of the Vatican during those years? But has anything changed? Only many many years after the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 did the Vatican recognized Israel's statehood. How does the Vatican under this Pope justify its hasty "recognition" of the Palestinian Authority as a state?

Anonymous,
June 30, 2015 6:32 AM

Appeasement

I think the short answer to that question is appeasement pure and simple . Anti-Christian persecution has really been amped up throughout the Muslim world during the last decade - Maronite Christians in Egypt , Christians in all the Muslim-dominated areas of Africa and Iraqi Christians being the latest examples . The PA harasses Arab Christians in Bethlehem . It will work about as well as Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler did .

(11)
Rabbi Yehudah Lowy,
June 28, 2015 5:49 PM

They could have saved Hungarian Jewry

Dr. Medoff,

Once again you have hit the nail on the head. The Allies were convinced that saving Jews would create a massive influx of Jews to their countries, and as was evidenced by the Evian Conference, no one wanted the Jews. Not the British, French, Russian or Americans would lift a finger to prevent the murder of Hungarian Jewry.

A number of years ago, I took a course at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem. There I sat in class with some of the primary scholars in Israel who related that bombing Auschwitz would have done no good, since allied planes couldn't even reach Germany at that time. It is clear that in 1944, that was not the case. While it might not have saved Polish Jewry, it might have saved Hungarian Jewry. And yet the "free" world stood by and let it happen.

No wonder that the modern face of Anti-Semitism is Holocaust Denial and BDS.

There was an amazing line from the film Exodus which reverberates in my mind. Paul Newman states "Jewish blood is cheap". That was and is the opinion of the world whether in Israel, or elsewhere.

Anonymous,
June 28, 2015 10:59 PM

My grandfather and his brothers worked with a committee to allow 3500 Jews to settle in Alaska in 1935/6. You know how well that worked out, also. (Morganthau nixed that one.)

(10)
Anonymous,
June 28, 2015 5:48 PM

One Million Might Have Been Saved

The claim that rescuing the people would have produced a "burden" and "asylum" on the Western hemisphere completely ignores the fact that there would have been no such burden as some countries like the then Commonwealth of the Philippines had offered to take one million Jewish refugees in. But the visas of those prospective refugees were denied, thus assuring their capture, imprisonment and death. Many that might have also otherwise escaped by other means were also denied. In the end, the world is truly a place that cannot be trusted and we cannot live by its rules but only by the mores and dictates of the Word of G-d that promotes integrity, fraternity, justice, and life. The world is anathema to this. We thus follow the Word and not the world.

(9)
Georgia Feiste,
June 28, 2015 5:39 PM

Balanced article?

Since the U.S. Is not the world, I'm wondering why all the examples were about that country. As a member of the world at large, I believe every country is responsible for world peace, not just the United States. Where was the rest of the world? Where is it now?

Dvirah,
June 28, 2015 8:09 PM

Helping Hitler or Keeping Silent

Most European & Middle Eastern governments were already under Nazi control or helping them (cf. Turkey, for one); Asian countries were preoccupied with the Japanese invasion which was a very nearly separate, parallel war; that left the West, of which USA was the leader.

(8)
Anonymous,
June 28, 2015 5:14 PM

burden or sacrifice

Just as 1940's political authorities lied and maneuvered to avoid rescuing Jewish victims, today's so-called "free world leaders" connive with Jihadi Muslim enemies to sacrifice Israel. Foremost among them, Obama collaborates with Khamenei to get rid of Israel by guaranteeing Iran an atom bomb -- fully aware of Iran's Death to America doctrine. This is plain treason and should be charged as such.

(7)
Geoffrey Joseph,
June 28, 2015 4:59 PM

A lot had to do with Pope Pius Xll attitude to Jews

Pope Pius was a covert anti-Semite & before and during the war constantly refused to condemn Nazi Germany or deeply criticise Hitler. His whole aim was to protect Rome 7 The Vatican City. Accordingly, if he had protested against the murder of our people, it was likely that his Catholic flock would have suffered as a consequence. Thus he let it be known to US & UK authorities that Jews were not to be rescued.by bombing the concentration camps.

(6)
Rick Pantell,
June 28, 2015 4:36 PM

Pilots dropping unused bombs into the Channel rather than bomb the tracks.

This question has been asked since the war's end. Decades ago, sorry to say that I can't remember where - possibly TV , radio, or at a lecture, I heard from more than one source that after a bombing mission had been completed, unused bombs would be dropped into the English Channel en route back to England, due to the danger of landing with live bombs. There were accounts of pilots requesting permission to use those bombs on the tracks, however, permission had always been denied. Can this be verified?

(5)
Regina,
June 28, 2015 4:31 PM

And there were many more...

Durwood Long, appointed by Roosevelt, told the immigration officers abroad to "delay, delay, delay" and "put every obstacle in the way" of Jews desperately trying to get visas to the US. I know this because my husband, Irving Schild, and his family had relatives in the US who tried to help them -to no avail. Thank GD, he was one of 982 Jews brought to a camp in Oswego, NY, during the war (1944) - but they had to sign an affit davit that they would return to their respective countries at the end of the war. Baruch Hashem, they were ultimately allowed to stay but not without a huge battle. Roosevelt agreed to this temporary 'haven' because he did NOTHING for the Jews and needed the NY electoral vote in order to get re-elected. And another thing: why didn't the Pope mention the complicity of the Vatican during WWII? AM YISROEL CHAI.

(4)
larry babitts,
June 28, 2015 4:06 PM

Winning the war was thw first consideration-

Why are we belaboring such a useless and meaningless issue? President Roosevelt was President of the USA and leader of the free world - His only consideration was - and should have been - winning the war over at the earliest possible time - While to position of the Jews of Europe was horrid, bombing the rail lines would have put military aircraft at risk for no military advantage - and would had zip effect on the "final solution" - it might have delayed the Nazi murders for a short period - it would not have stopped the Nazi program - The alleged actions by members of our State Department were not then - and are still not -the policy of our country - Don't you think that the creation of Israel (led by the Americans) was a result of no one - not one nation - wanting to take millions of Jewish refugees? C'mon be fair -

Simcha,
July 1, 2015 4:04 AM

Roosevelt Apologist

That's quite a tortured take on history but if Roosevelt and his State Department were so great, why did they close off Jewish immigration before the war? Millions of Jews died when they didn't have to and that's not fair. Justice, Justice you shall per pursue!

(3)
Richard Hess,
June 28, 2015 4:03 PM

Excellent article

As then and today...all is not what it seems.

(2)
jordan lewis ring,
June 28, 2015 3:47 PM

FDR AN ANTI SEM? MAYBE SO!

time is what history needs TO GET IT RIGHT! and in this case FDR aided and abetted the deaths of millions of jews as reflected by a mindset when as a child jews DURING THE FDR YEARS never talked in public re the issue of the liberation of the camps....anti sem in the USA was during ww2 everywhere....now we see that it was home in the WH. WHY ISRAEL MUST SURVIVE AND TAKE OUT IRAN NOW!

(1)
Steve,
June 28, 2015 2:58 PM

How bitter, how sad

How bitter and sad a commentary on Roosevelt and his administration. How terrible it is that every 50 years the Jews come under attack. How wonderful that the Jewish people survive and grow in wisdom, morality and strength!